Brittle Fracture of Ceramics - · PDF fileBrittle Fracture of Ceramics Introduction to...
-
Upload
truongngoc -
Category
Documents
-
view
235 -
download
0
Transcript of Brittle Fracture of Ceramics - · PDF fileBrittle Fracture of Ceramics Introduction to...
Brittle Fracture of CeramicsIntroduction to Mechanical Behavior of
Ceramics
Krzysztof DabrowieckiScott Clegg
June 7-10, 2009San Diego, CA
Probelogic Inc
June 7 to 10, 2009June 7 to 10, 2009 IEEE SW Test WorkshopIEEE SW Test Workshop 22
OUTLINE
– Sources of ceramic fracture in the vertical probe cards
– Introduction to theory of ceramic fracture
– 3-point flexural strength test of ceramics
– Finite element model of ceramic specimen
– Ceramic stress intensity factor (SIF)
– Conclusion
June 7 to 10, 2009June 7 to 10, 2009 IEEE SW Test WorkshopIEEE SW Test Workshop 33
Ceramic Fractures in Vertical Probe Cards
The major sources of ceramic fractures in the vertical standard probe card processes:
A. Inherent material properties
B. Ceramic machining –preparing of theceramic parts:
- Grinding - Cutting- Drilling- Lapping
C. Using ceramics as a part of probe card:- Assembly Process (tightening LD screws, accidentally dropping part) - Wafer Probing (OT wafers, high probe current, high temperature test)- Probe Cleaning (dragging probes at high OT over cleaning pads)
Crack
Cracks
June 7 to 10, 2009June 7 to 10, 2009 IEEE SW Test WorkshopIEEE SW Test Workshop 44
Classical Model of the Fracture Mechanics
Stress Intensity Factor KIC:
2a
f
f
t
t
b Flaw tip stress concentration
r
Stress Flaw Tip Concentration:
t
Where: o > 0 and o <= f
h
LC=1.12 for edge flaws
KIC – MPa em
June 7 to 10, 2009June 7 to 10, 2009 IEEE SW Test WorkshopIEEE SW Test Workshop 55
Flexural Strength Test
- Define and compare flexural strength of the ceramics
- Evaluate flaw size in the cross-section
- Correlate fracture toughness with flaw size
- Correlate strength received from tests with FE models
June 7 to 10, 2009June 7 to 10, 2009 IEEE SW Test WorkshopIEEE SW Test Workshop 66
Stress of Rupture (Flexural Strength, Modulus of Rupture)
Where: F- force
L- distance between supports
b – specimen width
h – specimen thickness
Three Point Bending Model
L
Force Ceramic specimenb
h
Max tensile stress
June 7 to 10, 2009June 7 to 10, 2009 IEEE SW Test WorkshopIEEE SW Test Workshop 77
Test DescriptionIn the ceramic flexural strength studies have been used four materials: macor, alumina, zircon and silicon nitride. The mechanical properties of ceramics are listed in table 1.
Five to twelve specimens for each material were prepared with dimensions: length=0.500”, width= 0.145”, thickness= 0.010”
The bending tests were conducted with the span length of 0.300”. All tests were carried out in an ambient temperature.
The load-force at the fracture time has been recorded.
Force direction
Contact Tip Size
Fixture Model
Ls
June 7 to 10, 2009June 7 to 10, 2009 IEEE SW Test WorkshopIEEE SW Test Workshop 88
Test Notes and Observations- No initial cracks or preexisting large flaws on the specimens
- All specimens under the load- force spontaneously and rapidly fractured without any signs of warning, some of them cracked intermittently after 3-5 minutes
- No dents or plastic deformations on the ceramic surfaces have been observed in the area of contact force
- Most of ceramic fractures occurred in the area of high stresses, in the middle of specimen
Table 1. Mechanical Properties
4.23.28.29.7x10-6/CCoefficient of Thermal
Expansion
0.40.280.240.29Poison's ratio ()
17532038066.9(GPa)Young's modulus (E)
4.23.923.232.52g/cm3Density (r)
ZirconSilicon NitrideAluminaMacor
Properties of materials
June 7 to 10, 2009June 7 to 10, 2009 IEEE SW Test WorkshopIEEE SW Test Workshop 99
Images of Fractured Specimens
MACOR ALUMINA
ZIRCON SILICON NITRIDE
June 7 to 10, 2009June 7 to 10, 2009 IEEE SW Test WorkshopIEEE SW Test Workshop 1010
SEM Pictures of Cross-Sections MACOR ALUMINA
ZIRCON SILICON NITRIDE
June 7 to 10, 2009June 7 to 10, 2009 IEEE SW Test WorkshopIEEE SW Test Workshop 1111
Data Analysis
The fracture strength was calculated based on collected fracture force data for each of specimen.
A graphical interpretation of strength distribution has been developed using Weibull probabilistic method.
The strength distribution has been shown on one plot for specimen comparison.
The finite element model was developed to validate the max bending stresses of alumina.
The fractographic observation was employed to determine the size of flaws and stress intensity factors.
June 7 to 10, 2009June 7 to 10, 2009 IEEE SW Test WorkshopIEEE SW Test Workshop 1212
Weibull Analysis
The fracture strength distributions of test readings have been shown in Weibull probabilistic plots. The cumulative probability was calculated using the median rank method. The strength distribution of tested materials shows a straight line calculated based on shown equation below. Two calculated Weibull parameters, scale and shape, are shown in table 2
Table 2 Weibull parameters
Material MACOR ALUMINA ZIRCON SILICON NITRIDE
Scale parameter s[MPa] 241.4 613.3 694.9 1352.0
Shape parameter m [MPa] 6.1 12.4 25.4 6.7
June 7 to 10, 2009June 7 to 10, 2009 IEEE SW Test WorkshopIEEE SW Test Workshop 1313
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700
Fracture Strength sf [ MPa]
Cum
ulat
ive
Prob
abili
ty F
(sf)
Macor
Alumina
Zircon
SN
Linear (Macor)
Linear (Alumina)
Linear (Zircon)
Linear (SN)
Distribution of Fracture Strength
ZIRCON
MACORMax 275.80Min 183.97
Range 91.83Mean 224.10
Std Dev 37.18
ALUMINA
Max 721.04Min 648.93
Range 72.10Mean 682.10
Std Dev 27.15
SILICON NITRIDEMax 1598.73Min 1047.22
Range 551.51Mean 1253.41
Std Dev 205.23
Max 656.27Min 528.76
Range 127.51Mean 590.00
Std Dev 49.61
June 7 to 10, 2009June 7 to 10, 2009 IEEE SW Test WorkshopIEEE SW Test Workshop 1414
FE 3-D Bending Fixture ModelFE Model
Alumina Stress Distribution Alumina Displacement
Fracture force = 2.57 lbs
Max Stress at contact point = 586 MPa
Max displacement = 0.00092 in
The calculation discrepancy:
=[(mean – ansys mean ]x100%= 0.67%
June 7 to 10, 2009June 7 to 10, 2009 IEEE SW Test WorkshopIEEE SW Test Workshop 1515
Macor Fractographic Observation
Flaw size = 50 m, KI= 1.8 MPa em
June 7 to 10, 2009June 7 to 10, 2009 IEEE SW Test WorkshopIEEE SW Test Workshop 1616
Alumina Fractographic Observation
Flaw size = 25 m; KI= 3.7 MPa em
June 7 to 10, 2009June 7 to 10, 2009 IEEE SW Test WorkshopIEEE SW Test Workshop 1717
Zircon Fractographic Observation
Flaw size = 25 m; KI= 4.6 MPa em
June 7 to 10, 2009June 7 to 10, 2009 IEEE SW Test WorkshopIEEE SW Test Workshop 1818
Si3N4 Fractographic Observation
Flaw size = 15 m; KI= 5.7 MPa em
June 7 to 10, 2009June 7 to 10, 2009 IEEE SW Test WorkshopIEEE SW Test Workshop 1919
Test Comments
5.74.63.71.8MPa emStress Intensity Factor
(KIC)
15252550mMeasured Flaw Size
1047648528183MPa Measured Min Flexture
Strength (sf)
Silicon NitrideZirconAluminaMacor
Properties of materials
- The SEM images reveal different crystal structure and configuration
- Smallest constituent elements and flaws increase the flexural strength and stress intensity factor
- Cross-section of zircon shows a considerable similarity to cross-section of silicon nitride
- Zircon shows a good fracture strength and fracture toughness comparing with macor and alumina
June 7 to 10, 2009June 7 to 10, 2009 IEEE SW Test WorkshopIEEE SW Test Workshop 2020
Summary / Conclusions
In the present study the 3-point bending ceramic test was carried out to clarify the relation between strength and flawsize at a fracture origin.
The 3D bending model of ceramic has been created to study and to correlate the stress concentration and material displacement of fracture materials.
The SEM images of broken ceramic specimens were used to understand material structure, to determine size of flaws and stress intensity factors.
June 7 to 10, 2009June 7 to 10, 2009 IEEE SW Test WorkshopIEEE SW Test Workshop 2121
AcknowledgmentsShoichi Asanuma - TOTO USA IncFrank Scanlon - TOTO USA Inc
Shigeru Shimizu – TOTO USA Inc
Joe Miller - Potomac Photonics Inc